Slashdot Mirror
Space Legos!
mfarver writes "The Air Force is seeking research proposals for Space Legos. Now you can have your childhood fantasies of playing with blocks and getting paid for it. Actually, its not a bad concept, standarized components that can be "plugged" together in space for different functions."
So what NASA is looking to do is create a modular spacecraft design?
Space Lego Blocks, dammit!
GTRacer
- Looking for a 953...
Defending IP by destroying access to it? That makes sense, RIAA/MPAA. Go to the corner until you can play nice!
18 -- Request for Information - Space Lego Project
General Information
Document Type: Special Notice
Solicitation Number: RFI-SpaceLego
Posted Date: Aug 07, 2003
Original Response Date: Sep 08, 2003
Original Archive Date: Sep 23, 2003
Current Archive Date:
Classification Code: 18 -- Space vehicles
Contracting Office Address
Department of the Air Force, Air Force Materiel Command, AFRL, Space Vehicles Directorate, Kirtland AFB, 2251 Maxwell Ave, Kirtland AFB, NM, 87117
Description
The Air Force Research Laboratory, Space Vehicles Directorate is soliciting information and follow-up discussions to support research and development of concepts for rapid-prototyping of space systems based on a kind of space "LEGO_TM". These "LEGOS", also referred to as "protosats", would be a (hopefully small) family of building blocks, from which any complex structure could be built, in this case the skeletal structures of spacecraft. The protosats could, for example, be panels that contain automatic mechanisms for engaging connections when two panels are placed together. The panels could contain wiring resources, computing blocks, etc. that when put together form a superset. The superset can be customized under software control (like FPGAs). A collection of protosats combined to form an assembly are also referred to as "macrosats". In addition to "LEGO" or protosat primitives, we envision the possibility of attaching third party devices (e.g. payload elements) in a modular fashion to the skeleton. The devices could be payload elements, motors (such as reaction wheels, solar panel articulators, etc.) that fit into recesses (perhaps) on the lego panels and engage into the wiring systems. We further seek to develop the feasibility of a concept referred to as "encapsulation". With encapsulation, we seek to build systems in a way that is both decentralized and self-organized. AFRL sponsored projects before in which this idea was demonstrated on the tabletop. In this example, five or more modules, each with processors, are connected together, forming a collective. When one module is removed, the "collective" senses the removal and adjusts accordingly. Temporary masters are "appointed", and if killed, new ones are assigned. The closest things like this in the industry are smart sensor standards (like IEEE 1451.x, LonWorks, HART), which embody some of the "plug and play" principles we seek. Our motivation is to build systems in the most rapid time possible. It takes 5 years minimum and sometimes more than 15 to build a major space system, from thought to orbit. We believe that under the right "framework", even the most complex systems could be assembled and fielded in phenomenally short timeframes, perhaps days. Most of the barriers to this goal are: (1) wiring harnesses, (2) software, (3) human fallibility, and (4) closed, proprietary "standards". By using configurable wiring harnesses, it could be possible to eliminate the need to fabricate them as custom assemblies. We would instead connect "LEGOs" with built-in reconfigurable wiring harnesses (a whole separate discussion), and configure them on the spot. It is our hope that somehow "encapsulation" might eventually eliminate the need for centralized custom flight software. Finally, self-organizing interfaces could negotiate the various elements of a system as it is being assembled, while serving as an open systems scheme to overcome closed approaches. AFRL is considering funding research in this specific technology area and is attempting to gauge industry / academic interest and capability. Responses should be sent to: Air Force Research Laboratory/VSSE, Attn: Space Lego Project, 3550 Aberdeen Ave SE, Kirtland AFB, NM 87117-5776. Written and e-mailed responses are acceptable. E-mail information to microsys@kirtland.af.mil. The information can be in the form of white papers, presentations, or proposals. This industry survey does not obligate the government in any manner for any future acquisitions. This is not a notice of intent to contract. The go
The name of the product is Lego. The plural is Lego. Only Americans seem to have this problem of pluralisation! Grrrrrrrr!
-psy
You do get it after all.
Didn't Berke Breathed have Opus spend millions of dollars in tax-payer money during the Reagan initiated "Star Wars" program only to deliver a Lego based defense strategy?
-2 point for non-originality.
We tried to build a machine from Lego in our research group a few years ago, when Mindstorm had just hit the shelves, but we found the accuracy of the movement was quite bad. So it can only be used for a limited range of experiments. On the other hand, it is very cheap compared to custom-build machines and therefore certainly worth taking a look at.
-- Cheers!
Doesn't this sounds a lot like how the Replicators got started on Stargate SG-1? Believe me, we don't need any damn replictors ...
My motto is, if the Asgard can't do it, I shouldn't attempt it.
***
Space Legos + Slashdot =
Millenium Falcon and bad jokesHmmmm...
You might want to build some of this like that. Lego all the way.
My cats ate my karma. They also wrote this comment.
"The great thing about multitasking is that several things can go wrong at once." -me
This sure gives a new meaning to sh**ing bricks.
from here. "Legos" makes no sense, dangit. How and why did people even start saying "legos"? The blocks/parts aren't legos! They're called LEGO blocks or blocks of LEGO or LEGO bricks or LEGO pieces... See, there's so many damn choices, why do people insist on legos? Gah! When I wuz a kid we knew what to call LEGO.
Although, I thought they did a lot of this already? Don't folks recycle software and module designs as much as possible when designing new satellites now?
There is no such word as "Legos", just as there is no such word as "sheeps". The correct word to use is simply Lego.
I'm sure that everyone who has ever read a slashdot story about lego must know this by now, so why are people still getting it wrong? Obstinacy? Stupidity? Or maybe posters (and the US Air Force) just think they are right and the Lego company are wrong about this?
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
The real question is which is the wrong pluralization. Why do we accept "sheep" as a plural form, but not "car"? Would it not be better to have a single method, rather than have to depend on memorizing multiple methods and exceptions.
Especially sheep. With the fading of agrarian life do we really need special plurals for sheep, oxen, or geese? (Although I do realize some slashdotters have a certain amount of emotional attachment to sheep...)
When I was a kid, we called them LEGOS. Because that's what they are; they're friggin Legos.
Isn't it just USians who say this? Here in Australia everyone I knoew refers to the product as "Lego".
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
Hmmm...I'm guessing Microsoft's bids on this will fall on deaf ears...
-----------------------
You are what you think.
See, there's so many damn choices, why do people insist on legos? Gah! When I wuz a kid we knew what to call LEGO.
Because normal humans, especially normal children, frequently shorten commonly-used words. Pedantry like that at such an early age should be considered an early sign of potential problems with obsessive-compulsive disorder later in life. Brand names which are strongly tied to a very particular product line are often used in place of the full descriptive terminology because words like "blocks" are superfluous to the conversation; everybody knows that LEGO makes. No one I know says, "LEGO blocks," just as no one I know says, "Kleenex tissues," or, "Pepsi-Cola." People just say, "Legos," "Kleenexes," and, "Pepsi."
People who do follow trademark awareness religiously tend to sound like a character out of "Demolition Man" and not like a normal human being. Maybe you don't realize it, but you're probably creeping people out with your ludicrous formalism. Relax and learn the socially binding power of colloquialisms.
Ask any kid who has a Lego product what the pieces are called, and he will say "Lego's". Not "lego bricks", not "lego blocks". Frankly, kids don't really care about the correct usage of a term.
:P When refering to them in plural it was still lego. For example:
*Heh, decides not to get pedantic over "Lego's" (Lego is?) vs Legos* (Muahahaha - fear my grammar nazism)
Maybe it's just 'cause I don't live in the US, but seriously when I was a kid, none of us called them legos (IIRC). Perhaps it's just another of your weird Americanisms
"When I was a kid I had lots of lego", not "lots of legos."
or
"When I was a kid I played with lego a lot", not "I played with legos a lot."
See, you don't even have to say the blocks or the s. It's actually shorter not to. And for this story they could have said "space lego". I don't really care what kids call it, but we here at Slashdot (though we're all kids at heart) are mostly adults, I would think, so how about getting it right, hmm?
What do you call more than one Lego? Lego bricks? Maybe it's just a US thing, but in the US more than one Lego is refered to as "Legos", and considering how many times "legos" has been used on slashdot I'd say using the word "legos" is a slashdot thing too.
When on slashdot, do as the slashdotters do.
my karma will be here long after I'm gone